- Joined
- Mar 5, 1999
- Messages
- 34,096
Yeah, Texas is sort of self contained.
-
The BladeForums.com 2024 Traditional Knife is ready to order! See this thread for details: https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/bladeforums-2024-traditional-knife.2003187/
Price is$300$250 ea (shipped within CONUS). If you live outside the US, I will contact you after your order for extra shipping charges.
Order here: https://www.bladeforums.com/help/2024-traditional/ - Order as many as you like, we have plenty.
Make a wish, Yvsa
- Thread starter Rust
- Start date
- Joined
- Nov 3, 1998
- Messages
- 4,331
Rust,
You may be gone, but I'll say this in case you're reading this. I don't think you cowardly. I don't question your "legitimate" birth, (like that means a good god-damned, anyway) and I really don't have any names I feel compelled to throw your direction.
I do find you selfish and illogical, though. Here's a statement of yours (regarding "mad dogs"): "I'd make every effort to avoid the dog. But I'd kill it if I had to."
What you are saying- and, admittedly, you probably just didn't think it out, or at least, that's what I'd like to believe- is that you are willing to let an animal with an incurable, fatal, CONTAGIOUS disease live so long as it does not threaten you.
Damn, bro.
Let's talk about emotions for a while. I'm a Buddhist, and Buddhism can be a philosophy centered around understanding realities. I believe emotions serve legitimate purposes in higher creatures that have less defined instincts. So, you're probably asking, this means what? It means some humans transcend emotions, experiencing them, but understanding the underlying thought patterns, sublimated instincts, and survival drivers. I believe it profitable to understand what is transpiring internally, but I also acknowledge it is unrealistic to expect most humans to undertake the sort of extensive self-analysis required to no longer be "tied" to their emotions. In this case, many Americans have feelings of extreme anger, and a refined type of anger that seeks what we call "revenge".
Anger and revenge-seeking are not, of themselves, constructive emotions (of itself, no emotion is), but if they force actions that are ultimately conducive to survival, then they must be a positive force.
A genuine understanding of life's realities will show that struggle and violent death are a part of the natural order. Examination of species worldwide will show predation beginning at a single-celled level. To deny that many forms of life take other life for their survival is to deny reality, "what is". Nations are a type of biological organism, a colony of collected individuals who have bonded for mutual benefit. To allow unchecked violence to the colony is unwise, as it is counterproductive to the survival of the colony. It is also in no way morally reprehensible to respond vigorously to aggression, and I issue an open challenge for anyone to prove otherwise using dictates from any "major" religion. (The closest I believe you will come is Buddhism, and since that is an ultimately logical system, good luck.)
Now, if one has managed to reach a state wherein they can perform the tasks required without attachment, that is well and good, but even if the tasks are prompted by (evolved) emotion, as long as the same actions are taken, from a cultural standpoint, what difference does it make? Would you begrudge us our humanity? What, ultimately, was your plaint? Was it that we ("horrors!") have emotions, or that we (god forbid!) will respond in ways calculated to protect our countrymen?
I understand that some emotions were also involved in your leaving, and since that is the case, feel free to write me directly, if you like. (Though, if you choose to email me, please do so soon, as I leave for Basic Training on the 7th.)
Accept life for what it is, and I believe you will find you have lost most of your anger, bro. It's a good feeling.
You may be gone, but I'll say this in case you're reading this. I don't think you cowardly. I don't question your "legitimate" birth, (like that means a good god-damned, anyway) and I really don't have any names I feel compelled to throw your direction.
I do find you selfish and illogical, though. Here's a statement of yours (regarding "mad dogs"): "I'd make every effort to avoid the dog. But I'd kill it if I had to."
What you are saying- and, admittedly, you probably just didn't think it out, or at least, that's what I'd like to believe- is that you are willing to let an animal with an incurable, fatal, CONTAGIOUS disease live so long as it does not threaten you.
Damn, bro.
Let's talk about emotions for a while. I'm a Buddhist, and Buddhism can be a philosophy centered around understanding realities. I believe emotions serve legitimate purposes in higher creatures that have less defined instincts. So, you're probably asking, this means what? It means some humans transcend emotions, experiencing them, but understanding the underlying thought patterns, sublimated instincts, and survival drivers. I believe it profitable to understand what is transpiring internally, but I also acknowledge it is unrealistic to expect most humans to undertake the sort of extensive self-analysis required to no longer be "tied" to their emotions. In this case, many Americans have feelings of extreme anger, and a refined type of anger that seeks what we call "revenge".
Anger and revenge-seeking are not, of themselves, constructive emotions (of itself, no emotion is), but if they force actions that are ultimately conducive to survival, then they must be a positive force.
A genuine understanding of life's realities will show that struggle and violent death are a part of the natural order. Examination of species worldwide will show predation beginning at a single-celled level. To deny that many forms of life take other life for their survival is to deny reality, "what is". Nations are a type of biological organism, a colony of collected individuals who have bonded for mutual benefit. To allow unchecked violence to the colony is unwise, as it is counterproductive to the survival of the colony. It is also in no way morally reprehensible to respond vigorously to aggression, and I issue an open challenge for anyone to prove otherwise using dictates from any "major" religion. (The closest I believe you will come is Buddhism, and since that is an ultimately logical system, good luck.)
Now, if one has managed to reach a state wherein they can perform the tasks required without attachment, that is well and good, but even if the tasks are prompted by (evolved) emotion, as long as the same actions are taken, from a cultural standpoint, what difference does it make? Would you begrudge us our humanity? What, ultimately, was your plaint? Was it that we ("horrors!") have emotions, or that we (god forbid!) will respond in ways calculated to protect our countrymen?
I understand that some emotions were also involved in your leaving, and since that is the case, feel free to write me directly, if you like. (Though, if you choose to email me, please do so soon, as I leave for Basic Training on the 7th.)
Accept life for what it is, and I believe you will find you have lost most of your anger, bro. It's a good feeling.
- Joined
- Mar 5, 1999
- Messages
- 34,096
Many thanks, Spec.